Tracking militarists’ efforts to influence U.S. foreign policy

Empower America

last updated: August 27, 2012

Please note: IPS Right Web neither represents nor endorses any of the individuals or groups profiled on this site.

The now-defunct Empower America was a right-wing pressure group cofounded in 1993 by Reagan administration Education Secretary William Bennett and former congressman Jack Kemp that championed conservative domestic policies and hawkish foreign policies. Other former Empower notables included Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI), Mitt Romney's 2012 vice presidential running mate who at one time worked as a speechwriter for the group,[1] as well as long-standing Republican Party stalwarts Vin Weber and Jeane Kirkpatrick, who served as directors of the group.[2]

After the 9/11 attacks, Empower America became part of a network of neoconservative-aligned groups that helped promote militarist "war on terror" policies. Empower merged in 2004 with Citizens for a Sound Economy (CSE), a rightist pro-free market think tank, to create a new group called FreedomWorks.[3] FreedomWorks, which focuses largely on U.S. domestic policy, promoting smaller government and less taxes, has served as one of the key promoters of establishment "Tea Party" politics in the United States.

According to its mission statement, Empower America was "devoted to ensuring that government actions foster growth, economic well-being, freedom, and individual responsibility. The ideas that have fueled America's stunning economic expansion—opportunity, competition, ownership, and freedom—must be the framework for reform of century-old public systems such as K-12 education, the tax code, and social security. Uniquely positioned in Washington, Empower America bridges the gap between the array of think tanks that produce white papers on the public-policy debate and the actual enactment of policy. In implementing our free-market, entrepreneurial principles into law, we are convinced, through actual experience, that we are the most effective 'delivery' system in existence."[4]

On national security, the group pushed for a "strong and proactive—but distinctively American—foreign policy, one that rejects both short-sighted isolationism and imprudent multilateralism. We believe that the federal government is primarily responsible for guaranteeing the safety of its citizens. Therefore, our goals are twofold: to insure that the U.S. military is prepared for any challenge it may face, and to rapidly deploy an effective missile defense to protect American citizens and allies."

Among Empower's more notable efforts during the early years of the "war on terror" was its creation of Americans for Victory over Terrorism (AVOT), an advocacy outfit closely aligned with pro-war neoconservative groups that helped push public opinion to support the invasion of Iraq. AVOT eventually merged with the conservative Claremont Institute.

According to writer James D'Entremont, while Empower America billed "itself as a 'nonpartisan, nonprofit organization,'" its board of directors was "a blue-ribbon panel of right-wing pro-corporate Republicans, and the organization itself is a kind of stepchild of the Heritage Foundation."[5]

Among Empower America's main outputs was its yearly publication of "The Index of Leading Cultural Indicators," which billed itself as a "compilation of facts and figures about the state of American society."[6] Bennett's introduction to the 2001 index stated: "By many measures, the state of our union is extraordinarily strong. We live in a time of peace and unprecedented prosperity. Citizens of America live longer, and more comfortably, than any other citizens in history. The average American today enjoys luxuries undreamed of by the richest and most powerful of kings in the last century."

The report also celebrated the country's unrivalled leadership in the world, likening the United States to a "colossus." Wrote Bennett: "In terms of military and foreign affairs, we bestride the world like Colossus. Our military dominance is arguably as great as any other nation's in history. No nation is perfect, but to a degree unlike any other nation, we have used our power to advance the causes of liberty, human rights, and democracy worldwide."

Share This Profile:

Please note: IPS Right Web neither represents nor endorses any of the individuals or groups profiled on this site.

Empower America Résumé

Selected Principles

William Bennett, former director

Jack Kemp, former director

Jeane Kirkpatrick, former director

Paul Ryan, former speechwriter

Vin Weber, former director

Mission Statement

"The ideas that have fueled America's stunning economic expansion—opportunity, competition, ownership, and freedom—must be the framework for reform of century-old public systems such as K-12 education, the tax code, and social security. Uniquely positioned in Washington, Empower America bridges the gap between the array of think tanks that produce white papers on the public-policy debate and the actual enactment of policy. In implementing our free-market, entrepreneurial principles into law, we are convinced, through actual experience, that we are the most effective 'delivery' system in existence."

Featured Profiles

At a recent hearing before the House Committee on Foreign Affairs, David Albright appeared to echo Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s criticisms of the ongoing nuclear negotiations with Iran when he argued that the “verification conditions” on Iran should be “permanent” or “last at least a generation.” Other experts, however, like Richard Nephew of the Brookings Institution, have pointed out that such sunset clauses are standard in arms control agreements and that “most people currently taking issue with the sunset clause are really just opposed to any deal with Iran.”

John Bolton, the notorious hardliner who served as President Bush’s UN ambassador, argued in a recent New York Times op-edthat the United States should bomb Iran even as nuclear negotiations appear to be making progress. He then wildly claimed that “the United States could do a thorough job of destruction, but Israel alone can do what’s necessary.” He added: “Such action should be combined with vigorous American support for Iran’s opposition, aimed at regime change in Tehran.”

Clifford May is president of the neoconservative Foundation for Defense of Democracies. A stringent hawk and Obama critic, May recently lambasted President Obama for his efforts to peacefully resolve the Iranian nuclear dispute. He wrote: “At this point, it’s all but certain that Mr. Obama is prepared to accept a deal that will be dangerous for America and the West—and, yes, life-threatening for Israel.” May then made the outlandish claim that Shia Iran could give a nuclear weapon to the avowedly anti-Shia al-Qaeda, writing: “[I]n addition to worrying that Iran’s rulers will use nuclear weapons or give them to Hezbollah, their proxy, there is now reason to believe they might provide a bomb to al Qaeda.”

Sen. Ted Cruz is a Tea Party Republican senator from Texas who recently announced his candidacy for the 2016 Republican Party presidential nomination. A right-wing hawk on foreign affairs, Cruz has worked to sabotage negotiations with Iran over its nuclear program. He was one of 47 senators to sign a controversial letter to Iran that he says was intended to “stop a bad deal,” wildly claiming that the P5+1 thinks it is “perfectly acceptable” for Iran to have nuclear weapons.

The Philos Project is a Christian advocacy organization that promotes hawkish U.S. policies towards the Middle East. Backed by right-wing “pro-Israel” donors like Paul Singer, the group has called for the use of U.S. ground troops against ISIS, has strongly defended Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, and has criticized efforts to peacefully resolve the Iranian nuclear dispute. Wrote one critic: “The Philos Project stands as an object lesson in the eagerness with which neoconservatives try to create the perception that their views are shared by a vast, diverse constituency, which in this case is warning Christians about the imperial designs of Iran and the dangers of a nuclear deal between it and the P5+1.”